Using lenticular effects is well known in the packaging industry, as are lenticular labels for fluid containers. The drawback to lenticular labels is the relative higher cost versus that of more conventional printing, and because the label must be thin, so do the lenses, necessitating a high lens count per inch, thus reducing the number of images which may be displayed and increasing problems for quality control.
Other lensing effects are known, such as in some liquor bottles, in order to be noticed behind a bar, the natural magnification of a curved bottle shows an inward facing image on a label on the opposite side. Many plastic water bottles have irregular surfaces so that the water within exhibits random lensing effects.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,494,445 to Sekiguchi et al discusses using a container assembly comprising an empty bottle with superimposed (combined) butterfly images on the back side wall and a grid on the opposite front side wall, having a printed transparent label as the grid, and another printed label on the back wall. However, this “grid” method suffers from the light loss inherent in such a “barrier strip” method.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,057,823B1 to Raymond discusses locating an image on one side of a container, which is imaged by, instead of a barrier strip, lenses molded into the opposite side. However, this requires extra glass or plastic to be used. For proper strength in a glass container, the thickness of the container, commonly on the order of 3/16″ or more, must be at least as thick as the narrowest portion of the lenses, and the lenses, if covering a substantial portion of one side, add to the volume of material. Or, if the lenses are to be recessed to the same curved plane as the outside of the bottle, this requirement makes the whole bottle thicker. In plastic containers, which can be on the order of 5 or 6 thousandths of an inch, lenses would also require a substantial increase in the amount of plastic that is normally used, and would present fabrication problems in a blow-molded or injection-molded container, which require a uniform wall thickness.
There are disadvantages to both Sekiguchi's and Raymond's designs and methods. In Sekiguchi's method, the image is inferior to lenses, and in Raymond's technique, the manufacturing cost is higher than normal.